The impact of long-term non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 epidemic dynamics and control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Non-pharmaceutical interventions to combat COVID-19 transmission have worked to slow the spread of the epidemic but can have high socio-economic costs. It is critical we understand the efficacy of non-pharmaceutical interventions to choose a safe exit strategy. Many current models are not suitable for assessing exit strategies because they do not account for epidemic resurgence when social distancing ends prematurely (e.g., statistical curve fits) nor permit scenario exploration in specific locations. We developed an SEIR-type mechanistic epidemiological model of COVID-19 dynamics to explore temporally variable non-pharmaceutical interventions. We provide an interactive tool and code to estimate the transmission parameter, β , and the effective reproduction number, . We fit the model to Santa Clara County, California, where an early epidemic start date and early shelter-in-place orders could provide a model for other regions. As of April 22, 2020, we estimate an of 0.982 (95% CI: 0.849 - 1.107) in Santa Clara County. After June 1 (the end-date for Santa Clara County shelter-in-place as of April 27), we estimate a shift to partial social distancing, combined with rigorous testing and isolation of symptomatic individuals, is a viable alternative to indefinitely maintaining shelter-in-place. We also estimate that if Santa Clara County had waited one week longer before issuing shelter-in-place orders, 95 additional people would have died by April 22 (95% CI: 7 - 283). Given early life-saving shelter-in-place orders in Santa Clara County, longer-term moderate social distancing and testing and isolation of symptomatic individuals have the potential to contain the size and toll of the COVID-19 pandemic in Santa Clara County, and may be effective in other locations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".